‘Made in America’ Claims in the Spotlight: The Either/Or Qualifier That Does Not Qualify

In Alvantor Industry Co. Ltd. et al. v. Under The Weather, LLC, No. 2:25-cv-08574-MRA-E, 2026 WL 712981 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2026), the plaintiffs — competing sellers of pop-up tent and personal enclosure products — claimed that the defendant falsely labeled its products as “Made in the USA” on online listings when, in reality, all of them were exclusively manufactured in China. The defendant argued that the phrase “Made in the USA or Imported” was not a false or misleading statement sufficient to support claims under the Lanham Act or California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws. The court was not persuaded, holding that whether the “Made in the USA or Imported” label would deceive a reasonable consumer — especially when none of the defendant’s products were actually made here — is a factual question that cannot be decided at this early stage of the case. 

About That ‘Or’ Language

One interesting wrinkle from Alvantor worth flagging: using language like “Made in the USA or Imported” does not offer the cover it might seem to. The word “or” might seem like it acknowledges the possibility that a product is imported — and the defendant relied on this very point, arguing that the plaintiffs were cherry-picking words from the label and that no reasonable consumer would be misled. But the court did not buy it, noting that the defendant “does not identify any authority establishing that it would be unreasonable for a consumer to believe that the statement ‘Made in the USA or Imported’ means that the product was made in the United States.” Put simply, when none of a company’s products are actually made domestically, tacking on “or Imported” can still leave consumers thinking at least some of them are. 

Other Courts Are Weighing in Too

Alvantor is not a one-off. In I Dig Texas, LLC v. Creager, 98 F.4th 998 (10th Cir. 2024), a company marketed products as “made in America” even though some components came from overseas. The Tenth Circuit found the phrase too ambiguous to be literally false, reasoning that “made” could refer to assembly rather than component sourcing. In Kaufmann v. Nordic Ware, Inc., 2025 WL 3754252 (D. Minn. 2025), the court similarly found “Made in USA” labeling on aluminum bakeware as deceptive and ambiguous when some materials were sourced abroad. 

A Good Time to Take a Fresh Look

With competitors more willing than ever to litigate, this is a ripe moment for companies to review product listings, packaging, and promotional materials to make sure country-of-origin claims are accurate and supportable. A little proactive housekeeping, like supply chain audits, label reviews, and internal advertising checks, can make a real difference.